Mar 9, 2021 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
Today, the ICJ joined an oral statement at the UN Human Rights Council denouncing attacks on lawyers occurring in Iran.
The statement was delivered by IBAHRI on behalf also of ICJ, Lawyers for Lawyers, Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada and The Law Society, during the interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on the ISlamic Republic of Iran.
The statement reads as follows:
“The International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (the IBAHRI), the International Commission of Jurists (the ICJ), Lawyers for Lawyers, Lawyers’ Rights Watch Canada, and The Law Society express deep concerns at the arbitrary arrests and detention of lawyers and others sentenced to exorbitant prison terms for legitimately carrying out their professional activities. We draw special attention to the cases of lawyers Nasrin Sotoudeh and Amirsalar Davoodi, who remain imprisoned and were excluded from Covid-19 prisoner release programmes.
Their imprisonment means that access to justice for citizens in Iran is restricted. We are alarmed by the widespread violation of fair trial guarantees, including the denial of access to a lawyer of one’s own choosing, as well as the recent application of the death penalty in Iran. We also condemn Iran’s non-compliance with international standards on conditions of detention and reports of torture of those critical of the regime.
We urge the Iranian authorities to:
- Immediately and unconditionally release Nasrin Sotoudeh, Amirsalar Davoodi and other lawyers who remain in prison after conviction in an unfair trial;
- Pending release, ensure compliance with international standards on conditions of detention;
- Ensure that lawyers and others can carry out their profession free from undue interference, including judicial harassment;
- Establish an immediate moratorium on the death penalty, pending abolishment; and
- Comply with its international legal obligations in respecting, guaranteeing, and protecting human rights.”
Find the statement here: Iran-UN-JointStatement-Lawyers-Advocacy-NonLegal-HRC46-2021-ENG
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ UN Representative, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949
Mar 8, 2021 | Advocacy, Analysis briefs
On International Women’s Day 2021, the ICJ publishes a paper considering the ways in which women in Eswatini face systematic discrimination in laws and practices, in violation of the country’s obligations under international human rights law with respect to women and girls’ right to health, including sexual and reproductive health.
The publication concludes with recommendations to the Eswatini authorities on how they may enhance women and girls’ ability to fully and equally benefit from and enjoy their right to health and their other human rights without discrimination.
The paper is entitled “Swazi Women’s right to health during the time of COVID-19: Recommendations to ensure enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and mental health”. It was launched through a conversation with Zanele Thabede-Vilakati, the National Director of Women and Law in Southern Africa (WLSA) Research and Educational Trust in Eswatini. In the discussion, Thabede-Vilakati outlined the obstacles faced by Swazi women before and after the COVID-19 pandemic. Talking about the ICJ publication, she added:
“The ICJ report on Swazi Women’s Right to Health during COVID-19 is an in-depth observation of all the issues which women face in their daily lives in getting access to their basic right to health. The recommendations made by the ICJ can only enrich Eswatini authorities’ approach to protecting and empowering women and I hope that they take these recommendations on.”
The report considers Eswatini’s obligations not only under national law, including under the Swazi Constitution, but also under international law in an effort to assess whether Eswatini is complying with its human rights obligations.
The report reflects on the obstacles that Swazi women have faced before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in exercising their right to health. Some of the key human rights concerns include: lack of access to sexual and reproductive healthcare; the high prevalence of HIV/AIDS among Swazi women; obstacles in accessing sexual and gender-based violence-related healthcare services; and inadequate access to shelters and housing for women in Eswatini.
Based on the publication’s assessment, recommendations are addressed to Eswatini authorities for specific measures to be taken to protect women, as well as meet Eswatini’s obligations under national, regional and international law.
Speaking about the report, ICJ’s Africa Regional Programme Director, Kaajal Ramjathan-Keogh stated,
“The right to health is a crucial right to everyone, but in a country such as Eswatini – one of the most severely HIV affected countries in the world – women’s right to health is a priority as women remain disproportionally affected by HIV. We hope that this report and its recommendations cause the relevant actors to reflect on ways in which they can assist Swazi women, especially in light of the increased obstacles that women have faced in accessing their right to health due to the COVID-19 pandemic.”
In order to realize the right to health of women and girls in Eswatini, the report recommends that the Eswatini authorities take certain measures, including the following:
- Ensure access to family planning health services for all women and LGBT persons;
- Parliament must enact domestic legislation, which clarifies the circumstances under which abortion is legally available to women;
- Ensure all health facilities, throughout the country, are equipped with all essential medicines;
- Guarantee access to information and education on sex, sexuality, HIV, sexual and reproductive rights especially for adolescents and youth;
- Prioritise the provision of pre- and post-natal healthcare services in a manner that does not risk COVID-19 transmission; and
- Repeal discriminatory laws, policies and practices in the area of sexual and reproductive health, including restrictive abortion laws and laws and policies that discriminate against LGBT persons;
- Adopt legislation providing for legal aid to enable victims of gender-based violence to be better able to access justice and effective remedies for SGBV, including through courts;
- Ensure comprehensive services for survivors of sexual and gender-based violence are available during the pandemic;
- Increase access to healthcare services for victims and survivors of gender-based violence, including medical and psychosocial support and ensure adequate rape kits in all health centres; and
- Increase access to shelters and alternative accommodation for victims of gender based and domestic violence in Eswatini, including accommodation or shelters that should be made available in all parts of the country.
Background
Eswatini is a monarchy. Under its Constitution, customary law, except insofar as it is inconsistent with the former, is recognized as part of Eswatini’s legal system in addition to common law and statutory law. Eswatini is party to several binding international, including regional, human rights treaties guaranteeing the right to health, including sexual and reproductive health, for everyone, including women and girls. Irrespective of the protections afforded in Eswatini’s domestic legal system, as a matter of international human rights law, Eswatini is bound to fulfil its obligations to realize the right to health, including sexual and reproductive health.
Contact
Nokukhanya (Khanyo) Farisè, Legal Adviser (Africa Regional Programme), e: nokukhanya.farise(a)icj.org
Tanveer Jeewa, Communications Officer (Africa Regional Programme), e: tanveer.jeewa(a)icj.org
Download
Eswatini-Swazi Women Right to Health during COVID19-Report-2021-ENG
Mar 8, 2021
Today, the ICJ publishes a practical guide which will give legal practitioners and others who engage with the administration of justice in Zimbabwe a readily accessible reference tool on the question of independence of judges and lawyers
The guide is entitled the International Principles on the Independence & Accountability of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors: ICJ Practitioners Guide No. 1 (2007) with annotations to current laws and practices in Zimbabwe.
It adapts the ICJ’s general Practitioners Guide to the particularities of the Zimbabwe justice system so as to make it especially useful for Zimbabwean practitioners.
The Guide takes as a starting point the principle of separation of powers and affirms that the judiciary serves as an essential check and balance on the political branches of government. In that way it can carry out its role in ensuring the fair administration of justice and as a guarantor of human rights.
Judges, lawyers and prosecutors must therefore be independent for the fair and effective functioning of the administration of justice. They also must be accountable for misconduct such as corruption or complicity in human rights violations.
The Guide comes with Recommendations with a view to bringing Zimbabwean law and practices in line with international standards
Speaking on the publication, ICJ’s Senior Legal Advisor , Blessing Gorejena noted that,
“The independence of judges , lawyers and prosecutors is a cornerstone to an effective judicial system and an enabler of access to justice. It is our hope that this publication will inspire reflection and reform in line with the recommendations made in the Guide, which will strengthen the judicial system in Zimbabwe”.
The Practitioners Guide No.1 on Independence of Judges, Lawyers and Prosecutors was published in 2007. The adaptation of Practitioners Guide No. 1 reproduces the original text of the 2007 second edition, adding annotations to specific national legal and policy frameworks in Zimbabwe. It is part of a series of ICJ publications on international law which are being adapted to the Zimbabwean context. The publication will assist practitioners in terms of understanding the gaps within the Zimbabwean legal framework that need to be addressed to ensure compliance with international standards on independence of judges, lawyers and prosecutors.
Contact
Blessing Gorejena, Senior Legal Adviser and Team Leader of ICJ Zimbabwe Project, t: +263 77 215 1989, e: blessing.gorejena(a)icj.org
Elizabeth Mangenje, Legal Adviser, e: elizabeth.mangenje(a)icj.org
Download
Zimbabwe-Adaptation of PG1 to Zimbabwe-Guide-2021-ENG
Mar 5, 2021 | Editorial, Noticias
En esta columna de opinión, el Comisionado de la CIJ, Rodrigo Uprimny, discute si las patentes de las vacunas COVID-19, que favorecen los intereses de propiedad intelectual de los productos farmacéuticos, tienen un costo inaceptable para proteger la vida y la salud de millones de personas. El Comisionado Uprimny también es Investigador en Dejusticia y miembro del Comité de Derechos Económicos, Sociales y Culturales..
Esta columna se publicó por primera vez en El Espectador, el 27 de febrero de 2021.
¿Por qué, me preguntaron en una conversación informal, tenemos que esperar todo este tiempo a que nos lleguen las vacunas contra COVID-19, mientras que la economía sigue mal y muere tanta gente, si ya hay muchas vacunas seguras y efectivas? ¿Es que acaso nosotros no podemos producirlas?
La respuesta a esta sencilla pero esencial pregunta es que el problema no es técnico sino político.
Tal vez Colombia no pueda técnicamente producir algunas de esas vacunas, como las basadas en el ARN mensajero, pero muchos otros países podrían hacerlo, incluso varios del Sur global, como India, Argentina o Brasil. Como lo ha mostrado Médicos sin Fronteras, no hay un obstáculo técnico a que una producción masiva mundial permita en pocos meses tener vacunas suficientes para todos los 7.800 millones de seres humanos.
El obstáculo es jurídico y político. Es la propiedad intelectual que prevé patentes para las farmacéuticas que crearon esas vacunas, que es un monopolio temporal, en general de 20 años, conforme al cual nadie puede producir esas vacunas, en ese período, sin su permiso. Y por eso esas empresas pueden también imponer precios y condiciones.
Las patentes son defendidas por los países ricos, que es en donde están domiciliadas muchas de esas farmacéuticas. El argumento es que sin patentes no habría innovación pues las empresas no tendrían incentivos para investigar y lograr nuevos productos.
No voy a controvertir acá esa defensa de la propiedad intelectual, que es muy discutible, sino que planteo esta pregunta: incluso si las patentes fueran buenas y ayudaran a la innovación, ¿es justo que hoy se mantengan intactas frente a COVID-19 si eso impide el acceso rápido a vacunas en todo el planeta?
La respuesta es negativa pues no sólo condenamos a morir a millones de personas, sino que además el riesgo epidemiológico es altísimo. Cada contagio es un riesgo de una nueva mutación del coronavirus. Nada excluye entonces que lleguemos a variantes que escapen a las vacunas actuales. O que surja y se extienda alguna variante letal para los niños, que por ahora han logrado escapar al efecto devastador de la pandemia.
Por eso, sin cuestionar la propiedad intelectual como tal, Sudáfrica y la India propusieron ante la Organización Mundial del Comercio, que es el foro internacional sobre estos temas, una exención temporal (o “waiver”) frente a las patentes de vacunas y tratamientos para COVID-19, al menos mientras se controla la pandemia. Podría incluso preverse alguna compensación justa a las empresas que descubrieron las vacunas, descontando obviamente el inmenso apoyo financiero que recibieron de dineros públicos.
Esta exención temporal es imprescindible pues las flexibilidades hoy previstas frente a las patentes, como las licencias obligatorias, son demasiado rígidas y limitadas para enfrentar esta crisis. Sólo el waiver permitirá que empresas y Estados con las capacidades técnicas suficientes se pongan a producir masivamente las vacunas necesarias, sin temer sanciones drásticas por violar patentes.
Esa propuesta enfrenta la resistencia de ciertos países del norte, pero ha recibido un apoyo creciente de muchos Estados y organizaciones científicas y humanitarias. Sin embargo, el gobierno Duque se ha abstenido de apoyarla con el vergonzoso argumento de que necesita más evidencia. ¿Más evidencia de qué? ¿No es obvio que hoy no hay suficientes vacunas pudiendo técnicamente haberlas y que las que hay están yendo sobre todo a los países ricos? ¿Y que eso se debe en gran parte a las patentes sobre las vacunas, que lejos de ser un premio justo a la innovación parecen hoy más patentes de corso a favor de las farmacéuticas, por la muerte que están provocando en el mundo?
Download the Op-Ed in English and Spanish.
ICJ Statements on Vaccine Access:
Global: “ICJ calls on States to ensure human rights compliant access to COVID-19 vaccines (UN Statement)”: (1 March 2021) https://www.icj.org/icjhrcgd2covid19/
Global: “ICJ urges the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to call on States to comply with their obligations to ensure equitable access to vaccines for all” (15 Feb 2021): https://www.icj.org/icj-urges-the-un-committee-on-economic-social-and-cultural-rights-to-call-on-states-to-comply-with-their-obligations-to-ensure-equitable-access-to-vaccines-for-all/
Peru: “The COVID-19 vaccine demands international and national solidarity” (23 Feb 2021): https://www.icj.org/the-covid-19-vaccine-demands-international-and-national-solidarity/
Africa: “The ICJ recommends that the African Union acknowledge COVID-19 vaccines are a “public good” (4 Feb 2021): https://www.icj.org/the-icj-recommends-that-the-african-union-acknowledge-covid-19-vaccines-are-a-public-good/
Zimbabwe: “The ICJ and ZimRights ask for urgent intervention on access to COVID-19 vaccines from African Commission Mechanism” (19 Feb 2021): The ICJ and ZimRights ask for urgent intervention on access to COVID-19 vaccines from African Commission Mechanism
Further reading:
UN Special Procedures: “COVID-19: UN experts urge WTO cooperation on vaccines to protect global public health” (1 March 2021): https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26817&LangID=E
UN Special Procedures: “Statement by UN Human Rights Experts Universal access to vaccines is essential for prevention and containment of COVID-19 around the world” (9 Nov 2020): https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=26484&LangID=E
UN CESCR Committee: “Statement on universal and equitable access to vaccines for the coronavirus disease (COVID-19)” (27 Nov 2020) https://tbinternet.ohchr.org/_layouts/15/treatybodyexternal/Download.aspx?symbolno=E/C.12/2020/2&Lang=en
IACHR and its SRESCER: “IACHR and its SRESCER Call on American States to Make Public Health and Human Rights the Focus of All their Decisions and Policies Concerning the COVID-19 Vaccine” (5 Feb 2021): http://www.oas.org/en/IACHR/jsForm/?File=/en/iachr/media_center/PReleases/2021/027.asp
Mar 5, 2021 | Advocacy, Non-legal submissions
The ICJ issued a statement today on the occasion of an interactive dialogue with the UN Special Rapporteur on situation of human rights defenders calling for measures of protection for lawyers who defend human rights and human rights defenders.
The ICJ was not able to read the statement during the interactive dialogue due to the limited time provided for NGO statements.
The statement was as follows:
“Madame President,
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) welcomes the Special Rapporteur’s report and agrees with her observation on the absence of political will in some States to protect Human Rights Defenders (HRDs).
As noted by the previous Special Rapporteur (A/HRC/37/51/Add.1), lawyers are HRDs when they act in their professional capacity to promote or protect human rights. Lawyers, like other defenders, are often targeted for harassment including through death threats and killings. The ICJ has recently documented such cases in Zimbabwe, Egypt and Ukraine.
The ICJ recalls that under the UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers, States have special protective responsibilities, namely that “[w]here the security of lawyers is threatened as a result of discharging their functions, they shall be adequately safeguarded by the authorities.”
The ICJ welcomes the Special Rapporteur’s recommendation that the international community, particularly States through Foreign Embassies and the OHCHR must react faster in addressing threats issued against HRDs. This should include situations where lawyers are threatened for doing their work.
The ICJ further welcomes the recommendation to maintain adequately resourced protection mechanisms for HRDs. In this regard, we consider strong and independent Bar Associations to be essential in helping protect the security of lawyers.
Madam Special Rapporteur, are there particular measures you would recommend for protecting lawyers when acting as HRDs?
Thank you.”
Contact:
Massimo Frigo, ICJ UN Representative, e: massimo.frigo(a)icj.org, t: +41797499949
